Re: DHCPv6 practical support
Jason White <jason@jasonjgw.net> writes:
> <remy.sanchez@hyperthese.net> writes:
>
>> however to seek further tools/knowledge re-use I turned myself to the already
>> massively in use ISC's DHCP server/client. With this one, I got several issues :
>>
>> * I may have missed something, but it looks like there is no "enable IPv6"
>> option anywhere, and I had to patch the init script.
>>
>> * ISC's dhclient with -6 option is "not working", in the way that the debug
>> mode tells me that it gets the IP and everything, but it does not apply it to the
>> interface. I don't know yet if I missed something or if it's a bug.
>
> As I remember, it runs a script to apply the address to the interface,
> but that script hasn't been updated for IPv6. Consequently, it doesn't
> work.
>
> In my case, I need additional functionality which ISC DHCP doesn't
> provide, as far as I can tell from the manual pages and Web searches.
I tried to summarize the status for open source dhcpv6 clients on the
ipv6-ops list a while ago. I believe the status hasn't changed much,
unfortunately. You might want to look at
http://lists.cluenet.de/pipermail/ipv6-ops/2009-December/002765.html
and the thread following. Got some interesting answers from Shane
Kerr (ISC) as well.
> The scenario is as follows.
>
> My ISP provides native IPv6 over ADSL. The (static) block of IPv6
> addresses assigned to my network is provided via IPv6 prefix delegation.
> The DHCPv6 request has to be made over the ppp0 interface, but the
> prefix (with additional bits added, i.e., to convert the /60 prefix to a
> /64) then needs to be applied to the eth0 interface. During the trial
> period, it is possible that the allocated block may change; after the
> trial is over, it should be static.
I believe this is (or at least will be when the ISPs are ready) a very
common scenario. And unfortunately, the ISC dhcp client does not
support requests over ppp yet. Due to its IPv4 legacy, I assume.
> I have this working with wide-chdpv6, but ISC DHCP doesn't appear to
> support it, so I'm staying with Wide for now, hoping that it doesn't
> fall into unmaintained status while it is still necessary.
Yes, I am also using the wide-dhcpv6 client for my testing. It still
seems like the most complete solution, although there are lots of small
issues which should be fixed. I've reported a few, but feel it's not
much point unless I have time to follow up. Preferably with a patch.
The Debian maintainer is great!
Bjørn
Reply to: